ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2024
Postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone in pN1 oral cavity cancer patients: A meta-analysis.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lymph Node Metastasis in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Evolving Prognostic Markers, Molecular Insights, and Implications for Precision Staging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone in pN1 oral cavity cancer patients: A meta-analysis.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the potential benefits of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in patients with pN1 oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Methods: A literature search through major databases was conducted until January 2023. The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of different survival outcomes were extracted and pooled. Results: Ten studies published between 2005 and 2022, with a pooled patient population of 2888, were included in this meta-analysis. Due to differences in study design and reported outcomes, the studies were categorized into distinct groups. In pN1 patients without extranodal extension (ENE), PORT was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) (aHR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.61-0.94). In pN1 patients without ENE and positive margins, PORT improved OS (aHR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.89) and was associated with a lower regional recurrence rate (RR 0.35, 95% CI: 0.15-0.83). However, in pN1 patients without ENE, positive margins, perineural invasion, and lymphovascular invasion, there were no significant differences observed between the PORT and observation groups in either 5-year OS (RR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.07-3.41) or 5-year disease-free survival (RR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.07-2.06). Conclusions: The current study demonstrated that PORT has the potential to improve OS in pN1 disease. However, the decision of whether to administer PORT still hinges on diverse clinical scenarios, and additional research is necessary to furnish a more conclusive resolution. Level of Evidence: 2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.